51–60 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd bet that at least part of that is in response to competition on the ground. Monkeybrains and Sonic (disclosure: long time sonic customer) both are bringing high-speed broadband to SF. In particular, I have symmetric gigabit for like $50 a month.
I have 15 down 0.5 mbps up sonic for $70...
Title II was never meant to be a good solution to net neutrality. It was used because it was the only level that the FCC had. Congress can actually craft internet specific legislation and should. It seems like Title II has become the end game for many because of pure politics, not because it is a good solution. Remember, parts of Title II had to be ignored to get this square peg to fit. No, don't vote for this. Devel…
I'm all for net neutrality, but I would also much rather Congress made it a law rather than relying solely on title ii.
This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Congress ultimately directly serve at the pleasure of their constituents, unlike the FCC commissioners. Point being, the time leading up to this vote is probably be the best time to let your congress members know your opinion on NN. Do not let the "failure"[1] of previous efforts to get congress to act in defense of NN dissuade you from fut…
The best chance is actually passing a bill revising the Communications Act of 1934 to explicitly include internet access. Anything else will result in a return to court battles over whether the FCC has authority to control the medium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems to me that some of the "ignored" parts of Title II would have nonetheless benefitted consumers. Personally, I would love to see last loop unbundling for broadband.
It's amazing for me to watch the tech community go from the hands off libertarian attitude to full socialist over this issue.
Net Neutrality regulation by the FCC is certainly not an optimal situation; it's trying to make the best of a highly suboptimal situation because there is no feasible path to an optimal situation.
This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Congress ultimately directly serve at the pleasure of their constituents, unlike the FCC commissioners. Point being, the time leading up to this vote is probably be the best time to let your congress members know your opinion on NN. Do not let the "failure"[1] of previous efforts to get congress to act in defense of NN dissuade you from fut…
> This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Shame, because this vote is incredibly predictable by anyone who has been paying any attention at all. Republicans are on the bullet train to dismantle and sell off the government to the highest bidders. This vote goes straight down party lines. But, it'll be an easy banner for Dems to hoist in November to rally voters, since it's categor…
This is equally true of the Democrats; they just have a different set of preferred highest bidders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Shame, because this vote is incredibly predictable by anyone who has been paying any attention at all. Republicans are on the bullet train to dismantle and sell off the government to the highest bidders. This vote goes straight down party lines. But, it'll be an easy banner for Dems to hoist in November to rally voters, since it's categor…
> since it's categorical that Americans do not want this madness As an outsider it is kind of amusing when I see lines like "Americans do not want" said by both Democrats and Republicans.
In the case of Net Neutrality, a survey which started by giving people pros and cons of net neutrality found 83% support for it, while another which phrased it as "government regulation" found over 50% opposed.
I would call this a good argument against government by referendum.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/12...
This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Congress ultimately directly serve at the pleasure of their constituents, unlike the FCC commissioners. Point being, the time leading up to this vote is probably be the best time to let your congress members know your opinion on NN. Do not let the "failure"[1] of previous efforts to get congress to act in defense of NN dissuade you from fut…
> This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Shame, because this vote is incredibly predictable by anyone who has been paying any attention at all. Republicans are on the bullet train to dismantle and sell off the government to the highest bidders. This vote goes straight down party lines. But, it'll be an easy banner for Dems to hoist in November to rally voters, since it's categor…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its an improvement but Comcast has been delaying real improvements for years but collect insane profits (afaik). I would love to see the numbers as well. The X1 DVR as far as I am concerned was horrible compared to the ReplayTV or Tivo circa 2001 (except for obviously HD improvement). It only took 15 years and lots of legislation mandating cablecards and whatnot to get them to get there. I don't have hope that they w…
Comcast profit margin is 12%: https://ycharts.com/companies/CMCSA/profit_margin That's on the high side, usually it's around 10%. For comparison, profit margins for Internet/IT companies are around 25%, Google's 24%. Facebook's a whopping 45%. Microsoft's a remarkable 26%. Is 12% "insane"? Which one would be the "sane" one?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Shame, because this vote is incredibly predictable by anyone who has been paying any attention at all. Republicans are on the bullet train to dismantle and sell off the government to the highest bidders. This vote goes straight down party lines. But, it'll be an easy banner for Dems to hoist in November to rally voters, since it's categor…
> Republicans are on the bullet train to dismantle and sell off the government to the highest bidders. This is equally true of the Democrats; they just have a different set of preferred highest bidders.
Republicans are far more dedicated to the task of destroying government than Democrats are. I agree that some Democratic senators have historically been pretty shitty on the topic of net neutrality but this false equivalence nonsense needs to stop. Republicans will sell off national parks, shut down the EPA and FDA and shut down any banking regulation you put in front of them.
IIRC, the FCC commissioner's (stated) argument against net neutrality was that it was Congress's job to legislate things like that, not the FCC's job to just write regulations to make it so. Arguably, it's a defensible point. Note well: I take no position on whether this was his actual reason, or just a smoke screen.